Again, he was found ‘not guilty’ of all charges due to his mental impairments.

He was ordered to remain in strict custody in the maximum security prison.

Despite a finding by the Supreme Court Chief Justice that the facilities at the prison were unsuitable as they offered no opportunities for rehabilitation or treatment for Mr KD’s mental health issues, he has remained there for the past 18 years.

The two other males involved in the Commission’s review, known as Mr KB and Mr KC, were also being held at the same prison until recently, when they were transferred to Kwiyernpe House, a nearby high-security, prison-like facility.

Mr KB, who has been diagnosed with a brain injury and epilepsy, was charged with unlawful aggravated assault, but was found unfit to stand trial due to his intellectual disabilities.

He was initially placed in the high security prison as a short term solution due to a lack of suitable facilities, however he remained there for almost six years – despite the likely penalty for the offence being 12 months’ imprisonment.

Again, the Supreme Court Chief Justice found that it was inappropriate to hold Mr KB in prison, however he was left with no other choice due to the danger that Mr KB posed to the community, and a lack of a suitable facility to supervise him.

Similarly, Mr KC was charged with unlawful aggravated assault and unlawful damage to property after he attacked his carer, however he was also found unfit to stand trial as he suffered from an intellectual impairment and autism.

His charges would also have likely resulted in a 12 month prison sentence, however he was held in a maximum security prison for five years before being transferred to Kwiyernpe House.

While the men are under the care of the Northern Territory’s prison system, the Commission found that the Commonwealth Government was responsible for protecting their human rights.

It found that the Commonwealth had failed to work with the NT’s prisons to provide suitable facilities to treat and rehabilitate intellectually disabled persons such as the four men described above.

Further, the government breached human rights by forcing the men to be arbitrarily detained, and by failing to allow them to live in the community.

The Commission made a series of recommendations, but the government has rejected the findings, stating that it has not perpetrated any human rights violations nor breached any treaties.

It further believes that it is not responsible for the actions of state and territory governments.

The government also argued that the Commission did not have the power or authority to make the inquiries and, accordingly, it would not inquire into the recommendations and arguments contained in the Commission’s report.